Main menu

Tag Archives: Animal Rights

Post navigation

On Tuesday, the city of Cabot, Arkansas announced that it will change its rules on pit bull ownership.

Effective May 15, previously banned pit bull breeds will be allowed to live within city limits. Residents who adopt pit bulls will be required to register their dogs. In coming weeks, the city’s official website will provide updates on the implementation of the registration process.

Once the change goes into effect, the City of Cabot Animal Shelter will be able to adopt pit bulls out to city residents.

In the announcement, the city acknowledged a growing need for animal sheltering and services within Cabot, as well as a need to focus on progressive animal welfare by changing their way of thinking and ordinances.

The ban went into effect in 2007, when the city stopped allowing people to register several dog breeds that were considered pit bulls. Dogs who were registered prior to the implementation of the ban were allowed to remain in the city, but under very strict rules.

The Cabot City Council’s decision to lift the ban on pit bulls reflects a shift away from the aggressive stigma associated with the breed, as well as a willingness to place more responsibility on guardians of pit bulls for the dogs’ behavior.

Under the current ordinance, pit bulls are classified as ‘vicious.’ The new policy is not breed-specific and will apply the term to individual dogs who show aggression.

Cabot is one of several cities that have recently repealed pit bull bans. So far this year, pit bull bans have been voted down in Gardendale, Alabama; the Missouri cities of Eureka and Liberty; and Garfield Heights, Ohio.

A photo from March 2017 shows Justice, an American Quarter Horse, in Cornelius emaciated from months of little food or shelter. His owner was later convicted of animal neglect and now the horse is being represented in a lawsuit against the ex-guardian seeking damages for pain and suffering. (Animal Legal Defense Fund)

Hillsboro, Oregon – On January 22nd the Animal Legal Defense Fund, the nation’s preeminent legal advocacy organization for animals, appealed an Oregon state court’s dismissal of a lawsuit filed by a horse named Justice against his abuser. Justice’s lawsuit seeks to recover the costs of his ongoing medical care and his pain and suffering caused by the abuse.

Washington County Circuit Court Judge John Knowles dismissed the lawsuit in September 2018, holding that a non-human animal lacks legal standing to sue on his…

Less than one week after Wyoming was ranked the 47th worst state for animal protection laws in 2018 in the United States, a bill to increase the penalties for cruelty was unfathomably defeated in a Wyoming Senate vote last Tuesday.
A seemingly subtle bill that WAN believes should have been a no-brainer, as it only called for the maximum fines for those convicted of animal cruelty to be raised, leaving prison sentences to remain the same.
How on earth did such a minor detail for such an important piece of legislation not pass?
WAN talked with the sponsor of the Senate File 33, Senator Mike Gierau, to make sense of the senseless move by Wyoming, which should be working to enhance its animal protection laws, and in turn, its ranking on the latest report released by Animal Legal Defense Fund.
According to Gierau, certain parties, such as ranchers and outfitters, are concerned that any strengthening of animal welfare statues will spin out of control with the government then trying to ruin their businesses.
That is not the case, Gierau told WAN, explaining that he is “sympathetic to the ranchers and outfitters to a certain extent” and wants to work with them, not against them, to find viable solutions.
Gierau also made it abundantly clear that the constituents in his area believe there needs to be more stringent rules when it comes to animal welfare; and that he is going to continue fighting for them, and for the animals.
As explained by Gierau, Wyoming is a “citizen legislature”; a chamber that is made up primarily of people who have a full-time occupation besides being a legislator. In the case of the Wyoming senate, some of the members are ranchers and outfitters.
Compounding the problem, the Wyoming legislature meets a mere 60 days over a two-year span. This makes it more challenging to work bills through the system, oftentimes, as in this case, limiting the preparation time allowed to properly present the bill with supporting information, testimonies, and more.
Most recently, Gierau had one day’s notice after the bill made it out of committee to be addressed on the floor.
“Doing my best to introduce meaningful fines for animal cruelty,” Gierau noted in a post on his Facebook page last month.
While not officially in session, Gierau explained to WAN that committees can continue to have meetings during the off time.
“I am going to keep working on it,” Gierau told WAN, sharing that he plans to recommend the topic for discussion in committee during an interim session set to take place sometime this year.
Currently, as per KGAB, a misdemeanor conviction for animal cruelty under Wyoming Law carries a penalty of $750 and up to one year in prison, while aggravated animal cruelty, which is a felony in the state, could result in a fine of $5,000 or two years in prison.
While the amount of jail time would not be changed, the fines would have increased to a maximum of $2,500 for a misdemeanor, and $10,000 for a felony.
Ultimately, when the bill was reintroduced this month, it had been amended to raise the misdemeanor fine to $1,500, and the felony fine to $7,500.
As previously noted, the bill was originally introduced in February of last year, but did not acquire the votes needed for it to be assigned to a committee for discussion, prompting Gierau to lower the suggested fees.
Among those that opposed the bill was Senator Brian Boner, who unfathomably stated that “in his experience most animal cruelty cases stem from people not having the money to properly care for their animals, not malicious intent.”
Not Malicious Intent?
Has Senator Boner somehow missed all the news, research, and reports that make the correlation between people who commit animal cruelty who then move on to participate in more serious crimes such as, domestic violence against humans.
One year has not even passed since 17 people were killed at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland outside Miami, by a 19-year-old mass shooter with a history of abusing animals, including frogs and chickens.
WAN will continue to update the status of this important bill and supports its passage.

There are lots of people who love and treat their dogs like humans; feeding them, giving them a bath and even dressing them and looking after their health. Unfortunately, there are some cruel pet owners who don’t have the same compassion and love for dogs.

Some people don’t really care about their dogs and leave them outside despite the really cold weather. But thanks to the touching story of Libre, a survivor dog, pet owners who leave their dogs in the cold can now face felony charges.

Photo: dogs.lovetoknow.com

Libre, the Dying Puppy, Rescued in the Cold

One example of an unattended, abandoned dog in the cold is Libre. Libre is a Boston terrier and was only seven weeks old when found and rescued by a produce driver named Dextin.

Apparently, his owner left him in the cold too long that he developed a serious skin condition called demodectic mange which made him crusty and hairless. He had secondary infections and ulcers had also developed in his eyes.

The doctors who assessed his condition said there’s a very low chance of survival for Libre. Luckily, the helpless dog survived and is now adopted and taken care of by a loving pet owner, Janine Guido.

Janine said she fell in love with Libre at first sight, “I just really connected with him. I don’t know why, because I’ve rescued so many dogs. I get butterflies before I visit him. Something about Libre really captured my heart.”

House Bill 1238 Successfully Signed into Law

The story of Libre touched many people’s hearts and Pennsylvania lawmakers were no exception. Apart from Libre, there are many other dogs in the state that are abandoned in the cold by their owners. This alarming situation made them step in and develop a law in hopes of preventing animal abuse and punishing people who abandon their dogs, especially in extreme weather conditions.

This year, House Bill 1238, also known as Libre’s law was signed into law. Pennsylvania residents who will leave their dogs outside in the cold can now face felony, particularly animal cruelty charges.

“Don’t leave them outside,” says Paul Tobin, a Mercer County Humane Officer. “The new law is pretty clear. Anything under 32 degrees, anything over 90 degrees, your dogs are not allowed outside for more than 30 minutes.”

Pennsylvania Lawmakers Teach Neglectful Pet Owners a Lesson

Residents who will break this law will need to pay a $15,000 fine and can be jailed for up to seven years. Significantly, Pennsylvania lawmakers are creating tougher animal protection laws not only to save animals but to also send a message that animal cruelty should not be tolerated and whoever abuses and neglects their pets should be punished.

According to Jennifer Nields, a worker at the Lancaster County Animal Coalition, “this won’t stop animal abuse but it will emphasize the importance of justice for animal suffering.

Though Libre’s law was signed into law just recently, Governor Tom Wolf has long been running his advocacy on animal protection. He signed the Libre’s law last June 2017 and it is one of the laws that made the Animal Legal Defense Fund and the Humane Society acknowledge Pennsylvania as the most improved for animal protection laws.

Since Governor Wolf signed the Libre’s law, residents and pet owners became more responsible and gave back their dogs to shelters if they thought they could not take care of them properly.

Last July 28, Governor Tom Wolf celebrated one year of animal protection with Libre himself with a doggy cake. Wolf wrote on his Twitter account, “I’m here with Libre to celebrate the first anniversary of #LibresLaw. Together we signed Pennsylvania’s animal welfare reforms into law one year ago today, making the commonwealth a safer place for PA pets.”

A lot of trending and inspiring stories have touched the hearts of many individuals but Libre’s story did not just make people cry but it also taught them an important lesson on animal protection. Most importantly, it made a big difference in the lives of many animals and the entire community of Pennsylvania.

If you think pets should be allowed to sleep inside the house especially during extreme weather — please share this post and spread this awareness!

Another horse became the latest victim of the cruelty endured by animals that are forced to work and pull carriages in NYC.
The heartbreaking incident took place yesterday when a distressed horse fell on a busy downtown street in New York City while pulling a carriage. This incident has animal advocates around the world outraged.

“We strongly urge the Health Department to investigate the condition of this horse, and make sure that he or she is not put back out on the streets,” Edita Birnkrant, executive director of NYCLASS, said in a statement, further explaining that a witness sent the nonprofit a video and photos of the horse while the driver and others were ‘pulling and dragging’ it for several minutes. “This latest incident highlights the desperate need for reform legislation to be passed as soon as possible by the City Council.”
As per the organization, the exploitation of these carriage horses includes being forced to work through brutal conditions during snowstorms, torrential downpour, and heatwaves.
Birnkrant also pointed to the death of two horses last month who died of colic in their tiny stables where they lacked any access to pasture or turnout areas as another indicator of the need to pass legislation to help other animals who are tragically kept in unacceptable conditions.
NYCLASS, which stands for New Yorkers for Clean, Livable, and Safe Streets, was founded a decade ago to save NYC carriage horses, enact animal rights legislation into law, and elect pro-animal candidates to office.
Currently, the nonprofit organization is working on a new bill that will keep carriage horses out of the chaotic Times Square, Rockefeller Center, and Lincoln Square. It will also guarantee them a safe retirement, increase stall sizes, and many other commonsense reforms that will drastically improve their conditions.
If you live in the five boroughs of NYC, please call your council member today and urge them to support the new NYCLASS bill. A list of relevant council members is available here…

By WAN –
November 14, 2018
Photos from IUCN
The Fin Whale and the Mountain Gorilla are among the species with improved status, according to today’s update of The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.
The IUCN Red List now includes 96,951 species of which 26,840 are threatened by extinction.
The Fin Whale has gone from Endangered to Vulnerable following bans on whaling, while the Mountain Gorilla subspecies has moved from Critically Endangered to Endangered as a result of collaborative conservation efforts.
“Today’s update to The IUCN Red List illustrates the power of conservation action, with the recoveries we are seeing of the Fin Whale and the Mountain Gorilla,” Inger Andersen, IUCN Director General said in a statement. “These conservation successes are proof that the ambitious, collaborative efforts of governments, business and civil society could turn back the tide of species loss.”
“Unfortunately, the latest update also underlines how threats to biodiversity continue to undermine some of society’s most important goals, including food security,” continued Andersen. “We urgently need to see effective conservation action strengthened and sustained.”
Previously listed as Endangered, the Fin Whale is now listed as Vulnerable, as the global population of species has roughly doubled since the 1970s. The recovery follows international bans on commercial whaling in the North Pacific and in the Southern Hemisphere which has been in place since 1976, there has been a significant reduction in catches in the North Atlantic since 1990. The status of the western subpopulation of the Gray Whale has also improved, moving from Critically Endangered to Endangered. Both of these whale species were historically threatened by overexploitation for their blubber, oil and meat.

“Fin Whales and Western Gray Whales were severely depleted by hunting and it is a relief to finally see their populations on the rise. These whales are recovering largely thanks to bans on commercial hunting, international agreements, and various protection measures,” stated Randall Reeves, Chair of the IUCN SSC Cetacean Specialist Group. “Conservation efforts must continue until the populations are no longer threatened.”
The nearly complete protection of Fin Whales throughout their range, has allowed the global population to reach around 100,000 mature individuals.
This update of The IUCN Red List also brings hope for the Mountain Gorilla, which has improved in status from Critically Endangered to Endangered, thanks to collaborative conservation efforts across country boundaries and positive engagement from communities living around the Mountain Gorilla habitat. The Mountain Gorilla is one of two subspecies of the Eastern Gorilla; the Eastern Gorilla species remains Critically Endangered.
Intensive conservation action, including anti-poaching patrols and in-situ veterinary interventions, such as the removal of snares, has contributed to the growth of Mountain Gorilla populations since the previous IUCN Red List assessment, published in 2008.
The 2008 Mountain Gorilla population was estimated to be around 680 individuals, but 2018 estimates show that it has increased to over 1,000 individuals, the highest figure ever recorded for the subspecies. The population growth has been confirmed through coordinated and improved survey methods.
Mountain Gorilla habitat is restricted to protected areas in two locations in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Rwanda, and Uganda – The Virunga Massif and Bwindi-Sarambwe. Both locations are bordered by land intensively cultivated for agriculture by a growing human population. Threats to this subspecies remain high, including poaching, recurring civil unrest, and human-introduced diseases ranging from respiratory infections to Ebola.
“While it is fantastic news that Mountain Gorillas are increasing in numbers, this subspecies is still Endangered and therefore conservation action must continue,” said Dr. Liz Williamson of the IUCN SSC Primate Specialist Group. “Coordinated efforts through a regional action plan and fully implementing IUCN Best Practice guidelines for great ape tourism and disease prevention, which recommend limiting numbers of tourists and preventing any close contact with humans, are critical to ensuring a future for the Mountain Gorilla.”
Sadly, the largest North American tortoise species, the Bolson Tortoise, is one of the species that had its status change from Vulnerable to Critically Endangered on The IUCN Red List due to exploitation for subsistence consumption, as well as widespread habitat loss.
The population of the tortoise, found in isolated areas in the Bolsón de Mapimí basin in Mexico, has plummeted by over 64% in the past 30 years. The species is endangered under Mexican federal wildlife laws and captive breeding programs aiming to reintroduce the species to New Mexico and Texas in the United States.

Like this:

Just sharing some Trump news

Prosperity and Abundance Statuary – Pixabay

President Donald Trump is no friend of animals or animal advocates (while his daughter-in-law Lara is), but have we ever had a president that was opposed to animal agriculture, hunting, etc.? Obama’s USDA Secretary was cattle rancher Tom Vilsack, for just one example, while Trump’s USDA Secretary is Sonny Perdue, a veterinarian, businessman and politician (NOT of the Perdue chicken family), although Trump certainly has some animal agriculture people and other abusers in his administration. But, what president hasn’t?

But when the PEOPLE reverse the market demand for animal products, all that will change.

Veganism surely has a great place in my dreamed-of thriving worldwide economy, but especially here in the US which is one of the world’s most influential nations. A thriving economy makes for a happier more secure population, which makes for less animal abuse and other violence…

Photos from Dog Meat Free Indonesia
With an estimated 1,200 dogs being slaughtered and consumed every day by people in Surakarta, Central Java, it is especially positive news that the Indonesian government has finally agreed to ban the dog and cat meat trade. The landmark decision was made during the “National Coordination of Animal Welfare” which took place in Jakarta at the beginning of the month.
Dog Meat Free Indonesia (DMFI), which had a coalition in attendance, explained that the major breakthrough came when at the close of the meeting, all national participants agreed to issue a ban on the trade of dog and cat meat in Indonesia and to prohibit the issuance of health certification for dog and cat meat for human consumption.
The DMFI coalition, comprised of Animal Friends Jogja, Jakarta Animal Aid Network, Change For Animals Foundation, Humane Society International and Four Paws, has long exposed the suffering of the dog and cat meat trade through shocking nationwide investigations in which animals were filmed being bludgeoned to death and blowtorched alive. The group has also revealed the routine theft of pet dogs and the rabies risk the trade poses to locals and tourists alike.

This agreement comes just days after campaigners from the Dog Meat Free Indonesia coalition issued a public warning that millions of global tourists could be at risk of exposure to the deadly rabies virus spread by the county’s illegal dog and cat meat trade, and just two weeks before the country hosts the 18th Asian Games, when some three million tourists are expected to visit the capital city of Jakarta.
In January, the DMFI also coordinated a letter to President Joko Widodo calling for urgent action that was signed by over 90 national and international celebrities including: Cameron Diaz, Chelsea Islan, Dame Jane Goodall, Sophia Latjuba, Simon Cowell and Ellen DeGeneres. DMFI’s global petition has also been signed by over 930,000 people from around the world.
“The extreme cruelty of Indonesia’s dog and cat meat trades is intolerable under both Indonesia and international animal welfare standards, and the government is right to be concerned about the impacts of these trades on its international reputation. With our growing awareness of animal sentience comes a greater responsibility to protect animals from cruelty,” Lola Webber, Director of Change For Animals Foundation said in a statement. “Customs evolve, and the nationwide movement from within Indonesia calling for an end to these trades is proof that Indonesia is ready to banish the dog meat trade to the history books of shame and illegality.”
“The dog and cat meat trade is utterly brutal, a risk to human health and largely fuelled by crime, so we applaud the Indonesian government for pledging to end the trade following our DMFI investigations,” noted Kitty Block, President of Humane Society International. “We hope that this bold step will send a strong message to other countries across Asia, such as China, South Korea, India and Vietnam, where 30 million dogs and 10 million cats suffer unimaginable cruelty for the meat trade, many of them stolen pets. We stand ready to work with the Indonesian authorities to implement a robust ban, end the slaughter, and bring us one step closer to shutting down these dreadful trades for good.”
The results of this national meeting will be used as a recommendation for the Ministry of Agriculture to formulate a PERMENTAN (Minister of Agriculture regulations) regarding the ban on trade in dog and cat meat, and that of exotic animals in Indonesia.

Help us continue to bring you the latest breaking animal news from around the world and consider making a Donation Here!

Please share our articles, follow us on social media, and sign up for our newsletter! Go Plant-Based!

Like this:

justice.gov
North Carolina Man Sentenced to Prison for Role in Multi-State Dog Fighting Prosecution | OPA

A North Carolina man was sentenced yesterday to one year and one day in prison to be followed by three years of supervised release for his role in dog fighting activities, announced Acting Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey H. Wood of the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division, U.S. Attorney Matthew G.T. Martin for the Middle District of North Carolina and Special Agent in Charge Bethanne M. Dinkins for the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Office of Inspector General.

On Jan. 12, Brexton Redell Lloyd, 54, of Eagle Springs, North Carolina, pleaded guilty to one felony count of conspiracy and two felony counts of possession and training a dog intended for use in an animal fighting venture, contrary to the animal fighting provisions of the federal Animal Welfare Act.

According to documents filed with the court, Lloyd participated with Justin “Jay” Love and others in a multi-state dog fighting conspiracy. These documents describe Lloyd and Love’s attempt to set up a dog fight between Lloyd and an unknown opponent in October 2015 and Lloyd’s breeding and training activities. Court documents further note that last year, federal agents seized 13 pitbull-type dogs from Lloyd’s residence. Ten of the dogs were secured outdoors by excessive chains, wearing thick collars, and positioned so that each dog was out of reach of any other dog. The other dogs were housed individually in pens. The water in the dogs’ bowls was frozen. Two of the four adult dogs seized exhibited scars consistent with dog fighting, and a third adult dog had four fractured teeth. In addition to the dogs, agents seized items related to training dogs for dog fighting purposes, including: a spring pole, a dog harness, and a hanging scale. Agents also seized veterinary supplies, including intravenous fluids, intravenous administration sets stated for “Veterinary Use Only,” injectable and other antibiotics, a 100-count package of syringes, blood-clotting medications such as Blood Stop Powder, and a skin stapler.

“Animal cruelty like the conduct in this case has no place in a civilized society,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Wood. “Yesterday’s sentencing sends a strong message that we are bringing to justice those who engage in illegal dog fighting and that anyone who engages in this conduct does so at the risk of significant jail time.”

“Dog fighting isn’t entertainment, it’s organized crime, and it has no place in our society,” said United States Attorney Matthew G.T. Martin for the Middle District of North Carolina. Martin added, “I thank our law enforcement partners at the Department of Agriculture, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Moore County Sheriff’s Office, and the N.C. State Highway Patrol for their exceptional coordination in bringing this defendant to justice.”

“The provisions of the Animal Welfare Act were designed to protect animals from being used in illegal fighting ventures, which often entail other forms of criminal activity involving drugs, firearms and gambling,” said Special Agent in Charge Dinkins for USDA OIG. “Together with the Department of Justice, animal fighting is an investigative priority for USDA OIG, and we will work with our law enforcement partners to investigate and assist in the criminal prosecution of those who participate in animal fighting ventures.”

This case is part of Operation Grand Champion, a coordinated effort across numerous federal judicial districts to combat organized dog fighting. The phrase “Grand Champion” is used by dog fighters to refer to a dog with more than five dog fighting “victories.” To date, over one hundred dogs have been rescued as part of Operation Grand Champion, and either surrendered or forfeited to the government. The Humane Society of the United States assisted with the care of the dogs seized by federal law enforcement.

This case was investigated by USDA OIG and FBI, with assistance from the Moore County Sheriff’s Office and the North Carolina Highway Patrol, and was prosecuted by Trial Attorney Erica H. Pencak of the Justice Department’s Environmental Crimes Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney JoAnna G. McFadden of the Middle District of North Carolina.

Like this:

Animals in India just earned some new rights and protections thanks to a milestone victory in court. The win comes in Uttarakhand, where the state’s highest court decided that animals “have distinct personas with the corresponding rights, duties and liabilities of a living person.”

Although the lawsuit in front of the court pertained to horses pulling carts, the judges Lokpal Singh and Rajiv Sharma extended these rights to the “entire animal kingdom,” giving all birds, fish and mammals protections within Uttarakhand.

Indian law already establishes two classes of personhood: the first is for adult humans, and the second is for children, people with intellectual impairments and companies (not unlike America’s corporate personhood rule.) Per the ruling, animals will fit into the second category and, as a result, benefit from similar personhood rights.
Be an informed activist.

While some hoped this ruling would prevent humans from using horses to pull carriages altogether, the judges didn’t go that far. They did, however, demand nicer care for the horses and extra safety equipment. There are also new weight limits on the amount of people/cargo horses can be made to pull. Furthermore, the horses are not permitted to work when the temperature gets too hot or cold.

As for wild and/or stray animals, they will be guaranteed free veterinary care and decent shelter as needed.

The court’s ruling also came with an imperative to the human population: humans are now stewards of the animals and are compelled to protect them from threats. Of course, there’s no guarantee that all people in the state will take that call seriously, but at the very least, animal welfare advocates will have legal backing when they try to intervene in situations on an animal’s behalf.

For now, the ruling applies only to Uttarakhand, though it’s an important first step toward earning similar protections throughout the country of India. Other parts of the world such as Quebec, New Zealand and France have extended similar personhood rights to animals.

As for the United States, granting personhood to pets and animals is a debate that’s unlikely to be resolved anytime soon. There’s no doubt from the rise in anti-animal cruelty legislation that Americans are caring more about protecting animals, but some humans just have trouble dealing with the idea of putting animals anywhere near their own level.
Take Action

Whether we call them “people” or not, animals throughout the world are vulnerable due to a lack of respect and rights. You can help to fight to make a change by signing some of Care2’s ongoing animal rights petitions.

Like this:

Breaking! High Court Rules That All Animals In India Are Individuals With Rights
By WAN – July 5, 2018

Yesterday, the Uttarakhand High Court in India granted the status of “legal person or entity” to all animals that are sentient beings, including avian and aquatic.
As per The Hindu, the decision was made because the animals “have a distinct persona with corresponding rights, duties and liabilities of a living person.”
The court also declared that Uttarakhand natives are the guardians of animals with the duty to ensure their welfare and protection.
The order was issued as a result of a public interest lawsuit seeking restrictions on the movement of horse-drawn carts between Indian and Nepal through Banbasa.

Sadly, the ruling does not call for the end of horse-drawn carriages, which would be best, but it does include specific directives to better protect the animals such as banning the use of spike or other sharp tackle or equipment on them and that they should not be harnessed to pull carts if the temperature exceeds 37°C or drops below 5°C.
The court also ruled that animal-drawn carriages have to be given Right of Way over other vehicles.

Other requirements include mandating shelter of suitable size for horses, bullocks, and stray cattle and an order that veterinary doctors of Uttarakhand must treat any stray animals that are brought to them.
With the new ruling, India joins France, New Zealand and the province of Quebec, Canada in legally recognizing animals as sentient beings.
Unfortunately, other countries such as the United States continue the battle to have animals recognized as individuals.
Perhaps India’s decision will influence others to ensure that animals worldwide receive the respect and justice that they are entitled to as sentient beings.

Like this:

theguardian.com
A South Korean court has ruled the killing of dogs for meat is illegal, in a landmark decision that animal rights activists have said could pave the way to outlawing the eating of canines.

The meat has long been a part of South Korean cuisine, with about 1 million dogs believed to be eaten annually, but consumption has declined and the practice is now something of a taboo among younger generations amid increased pressure from activists.

A ruling from the city court in Bucheon on Thursday, in a case brought by the animal rights group Care against a dog farm operator, said meat consumption was not a legal reason to kill dogs.

The group accused the man, who was convicted and fined 3m won (£2,050), of killing animals without proper reasons and violating building and hygiene regulations.

“It is very significant in that it is the first court decision that killing dogs for dog meat is illegal itself,” said Kim Kyung-eun, a lawyer for Care.

The precedent paved the way for outlawing dog meat consumption entirely, she added.

Dog meat consumption is a grey area in South Korean law. Despite no specific ban, authorities have invoked hygiene regulations or animal protection laws that ban cruel slaughter methods to crack down on dog farms and restaurants ahead of international events such as the Pyeongchang Olympics.

A lawmaker from the ruling Democratic party introduced a bill in parliament this week that would effectively ban killing dogs for meat. There are about 17,000 dog farms in South Korea, and operators have called for the government to bring in laws explicitly to legalise dog meat consumption and license dog slaughter houses.

A survey last year found that 70% of South Koreans do not eat dog meat, but only about 40% believe the practice should be banned.

Care said it would track down dog farms and slaughter houses across the country with a view to filing similar complaints against them to judicial authorities. “The dog meat industry will take greater heat because of the court ruling,” said its leader, Park So-youn.

The Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs in South Korea announced yesterday that it is establishing an animal welfare policy division for pets, under its livestock policy bureau. Issues such as these were previously assigned to a team under the livestock environment and welfare division.
The new division, formed to accommodate the growing number of homes in Korea with pets, will serve as a much-needed separate department that is tasked with taking charge of pet-related affairs and policies.
“The animal welfare policy division will tackle major assignments such as: preventing animal-related accidents and protecting animals from being abandoned or mistreated, as well as enhancing the ethical guidelines for animal testing, an official from the Agriculture Ministry noted in a statement. “We think this new division will be one of the busiest departments in the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs.”
As per the Korea Joongang Daily, the ministry issued the news along with some staggering statistics.
According to the government, the number of households in the country that own a pet has increased by more than 20% in just two years from 4.57 million in 2015 to 5.93 million in 2017.
The number of laboratory animals sadly also increased 18% from 2.51 million, to 3.08 million, while the number of farm animals grew by approximately 1,000 during the same time period.
While the establishment of a department solely dedicated to pet-related issues and policies in Korea is a positive step, the complicated country still has a long way to go when it comes to protecting its dogs.
Horrifically, dogs are still being slaughtered for their meat. There are more than 17,000 dog meat farms across the country.
In South Korea, Soi Dog is working with senior government officials to enact stronger animal welfare laws with the ultimate aim of banning the dog meat industry.
As per its website, this has already led to a ban on the slaughter of dogs at Moran Market, the biggest dog meat market in the capital, Seoul.
Thailand-based Soi Dog, and numerous other animal welfare organizations from around the world, such as, Southern California-based Animal Hope and Wellness Foundation, continue to challenge Asia’s understanding of the barbaric dog meat industry, while making people aware about the massive and unnecessary cruelty involved.

WAN prays that Korea, and many other countries worldwide continue to take monumental steps to protect our precious species!

Like this:

Elected officials answer to their constituents, it’s the core of the job.

All day long we, and our staff, field phone calls, letters, emails, social media posts, and even the occasional fax; filled with issues large and small which matter to our community. We respond as quickly as we can and I personally make it an office policy that no matter what the issue, whether its state, federal, local, or personal, I or my staff will not only do our best to find the answer, we advise the constituent on how to proceed.

It’s a tough job, but a fulfilling one. Every day (if we’re lucky) we get to make a difference in someone’s life, and every once in a while, we get to do something great.

Like this:

civileats.com
After a Decade of Promises, Has the Food Industry Made Progress on Gestation Crates?
By Lynne Curry

In early January 2018, Smithfield, the world’s largest pork producer, announced that it had achieved its “animal care” goal to provide group housing for pregnant sows on all of its U.S.-based farms. Over the course of 10 years, and with a $360 million investment, the company claimed to have transitioned its operations away from individual stalls, known as gestation crates.

Since the 1970s, gestation crates have been standard housing in most hog-breeding facilities nationwide. For the nearly four-month duration of her pregnancy, each sow lives, eats, and sleeps in a roughly two-and-half-by-seven-foot stall that does not allow her to walk, turn around, or socialize. After giving birth and living in a slightly larger farrowing crate for a month, she is impregnated again and returned to the stall. The cycle is repeated for three to four years until her production drops off, and she is slaughtered for breakfast sausage.

“These animals are raised like they’re parked cars, side by side, cage next to cage in a giant warehouse,” said Josh Balk, vice president of farm animal protection for the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). “If this practice was done to dogs or cats, it would be illegal. But it became standard in the pork industry.”

Over the past decade, this restricted form of sow housing has become one of the primary targets of public pressure, activist exposés, and state legislation aimed at ending extreme confinement for farm animals. And food companies up and down the supply chain have come under fire, and bowed to consumer demand for more humane treatment of farm animals—at least on the surface.

Between 2012 and 2015, more than 200 food companies—including meat producers like Cargill and Hormel, food service providers like Aramark and Bon Appétit Management Co., restaurant chains like McDonald’s, Burger King, and Wendy’s, and retailers like Kroger, Safeway, and Costco—all pledged to do away with gestation-crate pork. And while most of these companies expect to hit the target by 2022, it’s unclear whether the food industry as a whole will make good on its promises.

Gestation crates remain the standard on over three-fourths of U.S. hog farms today, according to the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC). And 98 percent of producers use gestation stalls at least some of the time, such as immediately after artificial insemination.

As the first major company to commit to phasing out gestation crates in 2007, Smithfield’s recent announcement sounded like a watershed moment for the pork industry. “Smithfield represents 25 percent of the sows in the U.S.,” Balk said. “They have taken positive steps, I would say—they are now using group housing for sows where they are able to live in large pens.”

“[But] it’s not old MacDonald’s farm,” he continued. That is, the animals are still confined indoors and spend their lives on concrete floors.

The existence of these crates also poses larger questions about whether it’s possible to keep sows in confinement and keep them healthy. Many pork producers contend that gestation crates allow them to readily monitor each animal’s health and feed. But with the advent of monitoring systems, such as electronic sow feeding (ESF), the main concern is aggression. Especially when pregnant, sows that are not dominant can become severely injured because of the strict social hierarchy among hogs in group situations.

“Farmers are using gestation stalls because, after years and years, they have found they work best for insuring health of sow and health of piglet,” said NPPC’s Dave Warner.

There is also a strong sentiment within the industry that animal husbandry practices should not be dictated to a country of independent pork producers. “We don’t advocate one system over another,” Warner said. “We also believe that any particular system that’s working for the health of sows shouldn’t be eliminated just because some group thinks that it should.”

While research shows advantages and disadvantages to both gestation stalls and group housing systems, many animal welfare advocates see the small confines as inhumane and believe that issues like aggression can be overcome with thoughtful animal management. They applaud the steps producers and retailers are taking to cut down on the crating practice.

But the question for those interested in animal welfare is whether company commitments make any real difference at all.

Public Pressure to Ban Confinement

Over the last 10 years or so, immense public pressure has mounted to abolish farm animal confinement.

Walmart’s own research found that 77 percent of its loyal shoppers said that they would have greater trust in a retailer that abided by humane animal welfare practices. And since 2002, voters in 11 states have expressed their beliefs in ballot measures that ban one or more forms of animal confinement, including hen battery cages, veal crate stalls, and sow gestation crates.

Massachusetts voters took the referendum even further in 2016 when they banned all housing systems that do not allow animals to turn around, lay down, stand up, and move freely. Even more significantly, the legislation, slated to go into effect in 2022, outlaws the sale in Massachusetts of any animal products raised in extreme confinement conditions from any other state. HSUS, which helped to pass Proposition 2 in 2008 in California, is currently campaigning in California for a similar initiative to appear on the November 2018 ballot.

However, the public’s general rejection of animal confinement has not yet made inroads in the major pork-producing regions of the country. The 11 states that ban some form of confinement, including Florida, Arizona, Maine, and Oregon, represent just 7 percent of the 200 million hogs and pigs sold each year, according to 2012 Census of Agriculture data. And the nation’s top three states in pork production and sales—Iowa, North Carolina, and Michigan—do not currently have referendums or ballot initiatives banning the practice. If a recent Iowa law that supports producers using tight confinement of egg-laying hens is any indication, major agricultural interests in these states are likely to resist significant changes.

Food Industry Promises and Hit-or-Miss Transparency

The retail food industry has responded to consumer concerns by making its own promises, starting with McDonald’s in 2012. “McDonald’s believes gestation stalls are not a sustainable production system for the future,” said Dan Gorskey, senior vice president of McDonald’s North America Supply Chain Management in a statement at the time. “There are alternatives that we think are better for the welfare of sows.”

The fast food leader’s pledge kicked off a wave of similar commitments but few companies have submitted progress reports on their efforts. Panera Bread recently shared its animal welfare report, stating, “100 percent of bacon, breakfast sausage, and ham served on sandwiches and salad was raised without antibiotics and was gestation-crate free.” But the salami in its Italian sandwich brought the company’s total pork supply down to 90 percent.

The global food-service giant Aramark has reported 30 percent progress on its declaration to eliminate gestation crates from its supply chain by 2022. In 2017, Kathy Cacciola, Aramark’s senior director of environmental sustainability, confirmed to Civil Eats that the company is on track with suppliers to meet its goal.

Because most companies self-report this kind of progress, however, transparency is an ongoing challenge. Take the case of battery cages for egg-laying hens. After legislative actions combined with consumer pressures motivated hundreds of companies in 2015 to commit to going 100 percent cage-free within 10 years, Compassion in World Farming followed up by contacting companies directly and urging them to publicly disclose their progress.

The results, published in EggTrack last September, represented just 20 companies, and only three—Whole Foods, Hormel, Noodles & Company, and Shake Shack—had achieved the goal to eliminate the cages entirely.

“A commitment is just words on a website until those words are put into action said Nancy Roulston, director of corporate engagement for the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA).

Converting promises into procurement standards and supplier contracts is a ponderous process. Even though the largest retailer in the world, Walmart, has thrown its weight behind the issue and asked its suppliers to phase out gestation crates, change has been mixed and murky.

HSUS is now focusing its efforts on getting companies to own up to their oaths. “There has been dramatic change,” said Balk of HSUS. “It doesn’t mean that we should expect that if we don’t keep an eye on things that things will transition by 2022.”

Setting the Precedent for the Smithfield Effort

Country View Family Farms, a family-owned pork producer founded on the outskirts of Philadelphia in 1895, was the earliest U.S.-based adopter of group housing—the alternative to gestation crates—and the first U.S. company to install the no-crate technology that Smithfield has adopted.

In 2001, Country View President Bob Ruth began experimenting with the electronic sow feeding (ESF) technology developed in Europe that allows sows to live in open pens using chips implanted in their ears that track and regulate their health, feed, and other activities. After formally testing the technology in 2007, Country View found that ESF was a “home run” for animal care and productivity, and the company has installed ESF in all new barns and remodels ever since.

Ruth admits that the injury rate at Country View is a “little bit higher” in the open pen system when compared to gestation crates. According to Sara Shield, behavior and welfare specialist for Humane Society International, the recent research bears this out.

“Once they establish a dominance hierarchy, fighting is minimal as long as the subordinate animals have enough space to avoid the higher-ranking sows,” she said. But research shows there are many ways to reduce aggression.

At Country View, all other measures—from medication use to longevity—are better with ESF, Ruth said, and the company is currently testing another European system that would replace restrictive farrowing crates and allow interaction between the sow and her piglets.

While Smithfield is now urging its contractors to follow suit, the company is still confining pigs in gestation crates for the first 42 days after insemination (full term is 114 days), a fact that was not touted in the January announcement.

Still, on the animal welfare front, this is big progress.

Trader Joe’s and Still-Rising Consumer Pressure

Meanwhile, consumer concern about animal products is still rising. Trader Joe’s is the latest retailer facing a petition drive to abolish gestation crates from its pork supply. Spearheaded by the animal welfare group Crate-Free Illinois, the campaign is targeting the popular grocer because it is one of the holdouts on taking a stance against gestation crates.

“When it comes to animal welfare, retailers have a tremendous amount of power to do good and to stop animals from suffering unnecessarily,” said the group’s leader Jessica Chipkin. “Even if it’s in 10 years.”

In response to questions about the petition, Trader Joe’s replied by email to Civil Eats, “We have heard, understand, and care about the concerns of our customers regarding the use of crates in the pork supply chain,” the email said. “As a result, we have clarified for our customers the products we carry that are from a crate-free supply. Additionally, in the next several months, we will be moving our fresh pork offerings to a crate-free [gestation and farrowing] supply and will clarify this crate-free attribute on the product labels for our customers.”

However, after a silent protest by Crate-Free Illinois at Trader Joe’s corporate headquarters in Monrovia, California last week, the company was unable to make a more specific commitment.

Demanding improved animal welfare on farms is relatively easy. But the true test will come when shoppers at retailers like Trader Joe’s, are faced with the higher prices associated with funding the transitional costs required to improve the lives of the pigs behind their bacon.

“When consumers support brands that have already eliminated cruel practices,” said Roulston. “They show other companies that they will lose business if they don’t follow through on promises.”

San Francisco has officially become the largest city in the United States to ban the sale of fur.
The news follows a City Board of Supervisors meeting earlier today in which members voted unanimously to pass a measure that prohibits the sale of fur clothes, accessories and products in the city.
The ban, which goes into effect on January 1, 2019, even makes it difficult, if not obsolete, for residents to purchase fur online because items with fur will not be able to be delivered to any San Francisco address.
As per a late amendment, furriers and retailers are able to sell their current inventory until January 1, 2020.
Really? This important law should go into effect immediately.
“I hope that it inspires other cities and the country to take action. Certainly, we need better federal regulations on fur farming,” said Katy Tang, the supervisor who authored the measure told WRAL. “There’s no humane way to raise an animal to peel its skin off.”

According to the local CBS affiliate, the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce claims that fur sales in the city are estimated at an annual $40 million.
While animal advocates are thrilled with this major victory, many retailers are frustrated at the impact the ban will have on them; some which are reported to already be “suffering.”
Similar bans have been already instituted in the California cities of West Hollywood and Berkeley.
Here’s to many more cities throughout the country and world following suit!

newindianexpress.com
Activists see red over transfer of elephant calves to from Mysuru zoo Singapore – The New Indian Express
3-4 minutes

BENGALURU/ MYSURU: The move to transfer four elephant calves from Mysuru zoo to Singapore zoo has drawn the ire of wildlife organisations and activists. They say any such activity is banned and illegal under the prevailing norms. The elephant calves are presently in Mysuru zoo waiting to be airlifted to Singapore as the Central Zoo Authority (CZA) has not given permission. On January 25, these calves were handed over to the zoo where they have been kept captive for the last 27 days.

Questioning the exchange of calves, various members of the conservation community say, “This is an illegal procedure. Zoos are actually discouraged from keeping elephants …so how can they take four calves from a forest camp and export them as zoo animals? The calves brought from the Rampura Elephant Camp in Bandipur are not owned by Mysore zoo. When such is the case, how can the zoo transfer them to Singapore zoo? Selling elephants in the form of transfer/exchange/gift, etc., is banned and illegal.”

Mysuru zoo director C Ravi Shankar told Express, “We have applied for permission to CZA, but are yet to get it. We are adhering to all norms and as soon as we get permission, we will send them to Singapore.”
Prakash Saha, co-founder, Elsa Foundation, adds, “It violates the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. How can the Forest Department give young calves from their camp? They have forcefully separated the calves which have lived with their mother and other herd members in the camp. With this act, the protectors have made them orphans by allowing the calves to be sent to a cramped and commercial Singapore zoo which keeps animals for entertainment.”

The Elsa Foundation has submitted a representation to both the Forest Department and CZA. “We have requested them to immediately stop this transfer as it is in total violation of the laws and against the conservation of the species.” said Saha.Meanwhile, a senior forest official told Express that exchange programmes are going on regularly between zoos and if Singapore zoo is giving them rhinos, Mysuru zoo will have to give some animals in exchange. However, he added, “The Forest Department does not get involved in this unless it becomes an issue.”

Ex-PM’s INTERVENTION
In 2004-05, then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had intervened and stopped the transfer of an elephant calf, Veda, from Bannerghatta to an unsuitable zoo in Armenia as a government gift. This action saved many elephants from such a distressing fate. Subsequently, in 2009, a ban was introduced by CZA on gifting elephants to zoos.

THE BAN ORDER
As per CZA notification, 2009, all elephants are banned from zoo collections throughout the country and all captive ones should be rehabilitated in elephant camps/rehabilitation camps/facilities available with the Forest Department at protected areas. Since the mega-herbivores are free-ranging animals, needing lot of space for their free movement over long distances, such a directive was passed.

Today’s verdict is a fitting end to a horror story that began to unfold in June 2017, when The HSUS assisted in an extraordinary rescue of 84 Great Danes from a New Hampshire mansion belonging to a wealthy breeder. Photo by Lindsay Hamrick/The HSUS

In a huge victory in our ongoing fight against commercial breeders who neglect and mistreat the animals in their care, a New Hampshire jury today found a woman who kept 84 Great Danes in filthy conditions inside a New Hampshire mansion guilty on 17 counts of animal cruelty.

This is a fitting end to a horror story that began to unfold in June 2017, when The HSUS assisted in an extraordinary rescue of 84 Great Danes from the custody of Christina Fay. Fay claimed she provided the dogs with outstanding care, but when our Animal Rescue Team entered the building with the Wolfeboro Police Department, which had requested The HSUS’s assistance, the contrast between the mansion’s opulent façade and the conditions inside was shocking. There was an overpowering smell that hit our team members as they walked in, and feces and debris were smeared across all the walls to the point where the windows were opaque. Other dogs in the home appeared to have spent countless hours in cages with no access to water.

In December, a district court convicted and sentenced Fay on 10 counts of animal cruelty, a decision she appealed. The jury that handed down today’s decision after a two-week trial at the Carroll County Superior Court in Ossipee, New Hampshire, heard compelling testimony from witnesses, including a veterinarian experienced in investigating animal cruelty cases who testified that conditions within Fay’s home were the worst she had ever seen.

Many of the dogs were ill and in distress when we found them, and suffered from an array of health problems, including severe eye issues and symptoms associated with communicable illnesses. For The HSUS, which has led the effort to care for the dogs at an emergency animal shelter we constructed especially for them, this has been an expensive undertaking that has cost $1.3 million so far.

On a related track, we have been working with New Hampshire lawmakers to address the enormous financial burden on taxpayers and non-profit organizations in caring for animals legally seized from cruelty investigations. Last week, the state Senate passed a bill that puts the financial burden of caring for rescued animals on the perpetrators of the cruelty involved, rather than on taxpayers.

The bipartisan bill, introduced by Senate Majority Leader Jeb Bradley, R-Wolfeboro, would also reform commercial breeder regulations and strengthen penalties for egregious cruelty. New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu, who announced this summer that he’s planning to work with advocates and lawmakers on common sense regulation protecting animals, applauded the passage of the Senate bill and has urged the House to send it to his desk. “Animal Cruelty will not be tolerated in New Hampshire,” Sununu said, adding that the bill would ensure that the “horrendous treatment of the Great Danes from Wolfeboro never happens again.”

This week, we also expect the New Hampshire Senate finance committee to vote to approve a $200,000 appropriation in the bill which would fund two new inspectors for the Department of Agriculture to inspect not only commercial dog kennels but all currently licensed entities like animal shelters, rescue organizations, and pet stores. A hearing to determine sentencing for Fay and the custody of the dogs is expected to be scheduled within 30 days.

P.S. In another case brought to light by our HSUS rescue team, we got good news last week from Alabama, where we helped with a rescue of 65 dogs from a suspected breeding operation in 2015. The dogs and puppies were starving, severely underweight, and living in terrible conditions. Last week, a court found defendant Jerome Wesley Hughes guilty on six counts of felony animal cruelty and one misdemeanor.

Like this:

A boxer puppy was beaten and stomped in a senseless act of violence. While this dog’s life could not be spared, Texas officials have ensured that the man responsible will be severely punished for this barbaric act. Sign this petition to express support for this sentencing.

Tomorrow, CNN broadcasts the film “Trophy”, a pro-trophy hunting film.

The film was initially presented to CWI as a balanced look at trophy hunting. For that reason, we gave an interview for the film. Executive Director Carrie LeBlanc appears in Trophy, as one of only two primary dissenting voices against trophy hunting.

When we saw the completed film last fall, we were horrified. As it turns out, the films director manipulated and used an anti-trophy hunting protest we held in Las Vegas to their own ends and put a trophy hunter amongst our protesters to provoke response.

Trophy attempts, poorly, to make trophy hunters seem like sympathetic figures, instead of the killers they are.

Like this:

The United States Department of Justice
Department of Justice
Office of Public Affairs
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Friday, January 12, 2018
North Carolina Man Pleads Guilty in Multi-State Dog Fighting Prosecution

A North Carolina man pleaded guilty to federal dog fighting and conspiracy charges yesterday, announced United States Attorney Matthew G.T. Martin and Acting Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey H. Wood of the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division.

Brexton Redell Lloyd, 54, of Eagle Springs, North Carolina, pleaded guilty to one felony count of conspiracy and two felony counts of possession and training a dog intended for use in an animal fighting venture, contrary to the animal fighting provisions of the federal Animal Welfare Act. Each count carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

According to documents filed with the court, Lloyd participated with Justin “Jay” Love and others in a multi-state dog fighting conspiracy. These documents describe Lloyd and Love’s attempt to set up a dog fight between Lloyd and an unknown opponent in October 2015 and Lloyd’s breeding and training activities. Court documents further note that earlier this year, agents seized thirteen pit bull-type dogs from Lloyd’s residence. Ten of the dogs were secured outdoors by excessive chains, wearing thick collars, and positioned so that each dog was out of reach of any other dog. The other dogs were housed individually in pens. The water in the dogs’ bowls was frozen. Two of the four adult dogs seized exhibited scars consistent with dog fighting, and a third adult dog had four fractured teeth. In addition to the dogs, agents seized items related to training dogs for dog fighting purposes, including: a spring pole, a dog harness, and a hanging scale. Agents also seized veterinary supplies, including: intravenous fluids, intravenous administration sets stated for “Veterinary Use Only,” injectable and other antibiotics, a 100-count package of syringes, blood clotting medications such as Blood Stop Powder, and a skin stapler.

“Organized crime has no place in North Carolina or the United States – and dog fighting of this sort is nothing short of organized crime. Our law enforcement partners at the Department of Agriculture, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Moore County Sheriff’s Office, and the N.C. State Highway Patrol demonstrated exceptional coordination in bringing this defendant to justice,” said United States Attorney Matthew G.T. Martin for the Middle District of North Carolina.

“Yesterday’s guilty plea and our continuing efforts to investigate and prosecute these cases send a strong message that our justice system will not tolerate the torment and death of animals in the fighting ring, all for the sake of illegal gambling,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General. “Federal law is clear on this point and will continue to be enforced.”

“The provisions of the Animal Welfare Act were designed to protect animals from being used in illegal fighting ventures, which often entail other forms of criminal activity involving drugs, firearms and gambling,” said Special Agent in Charge Bethanne M. Dinkins for U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Office of Inspector General. “Together with the Department of Justice, animal fighting is an investigative priority for USDA OIG, and we will work with our law enforcement partners to investigate and assist in the criminal prosecution of those who participate in animal fighting ventures.”

This case is part of Operation Grand Champion, a coordinated effort across numerous federal judicial districts to combat organized dog fighting. The phrase “Grand Champion” is used by dog fighters to refer to a dog with more than five dog fighting “victories.” To date, over one hundred dogs have been rescued as part of Operation Grand Champion, and either surrendered or forfeited to the government. The Humane Society of the United States assisted with the care of the dogs seized by federal law enforcement.

This case was investigated by USDA-OIG and FBI, with assistance from the Moore County Sheriff’s Office and the North Carolina Highway Patrol, and is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney JoAnna G. McFadden and Trial Attorney Erica H. Pencak of the Justice Department’s Environmental Crimes Section Environmental Crimes Section.

Like this:

Richard Blumenthal, United States Senator for Connecticut
Blumenthal Announces Senate Passage of First Ever Federal Anti-Animal Cruelty Statute
Friday, December 15, 2017
(Washington, D.C.) – U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) announced today the United States Senate has unanimously passed his bipartisan Prevent Animal Cruelty and Torture (PACT) Act. If signed into law, the measure would be the first-ever general federal anti-animal cruelty statute.

Blumenthal introduced the bill with Senator Pat Toomey (R-Pa.). It would outlaw a heinous form of animal abuse known as “crushing,” where deranged individuals maim and torture animals.

Despite taking steps in 2010 to ban the sale of videos depicting animal crushing, Congress failed to make the underlying act of crushing a federal crime. This means that–even when there is overwhelming evidence that torture is taking place–federal law enforcement is unable to protect animals from abuse or even arrest known abusers. The PACT Act would ensure that individuals found guilty of torturing animals face felony charges, fines, and up to seven years in prison.

“This bipartisan measure finally prohibits a heinous, inhumane practice–stating emphatically once and for all that there is no place in a civilized society for the maiming and torturing of animals,” said Sen. Blumenthal. “Thanks to the long overdue action of the Senate, the barbaric individuals who commit these crimes will no longer walk free. I call on the House to pass this important legislation immediately.”

“Animal crushing is absolutely disgusting and there is no place for this behavior in our society,” said Sen. Toomey. “It is long past time this abhorrent practice came to an end and I am glad the Senate once again took the next step towards advancing that goal. I am hopeful that this bipartisan bill will pass the House and finally get enacted into law.”

“Our nation should have a zero tolerance policy for malicious cruelty to animals or sexual exploitation of defenseless creatures,” said Wayne Pacelle, president and CEO of The Humane Society of the United States. ”We are immensely grateful to Senators Toomey and Blumenthal for leading this fight and securing this enormous win for animal welfare.”

The PACT Act is endorsed by the Humane Society of the United States, National Sheriffs’ Association, Fraternal Order of Police, and the Association of Prosecuting Attorneys.

Like this:

David Zabel, Connecticut area counsel for the NhRP, offers some important facts about elephant intelligence:

[W]e know they have a sense of self, remember the past and plan for the future, engage in complex communication, show empathy, and mourn their dead. But their legal status as ‘things’ with no rights has remained exactly the same. What’s at stake here is the freedom of beings who are no less self-aware and autonomous than we humans are.

This isn’t the first time NhRP has attempted to win personhood rights for animals. In 2013, the group sued on behalf of a chimpanzee named Tommy, another named Kiko, and two former laboratory chimps named Hercules and Leo. But none of these New York cases succeeded in getting recognition of the chimps’ legal personhood.

Like this:

As this is a last minute effort with a limited time frame, I will not go into detail on this post in regard to the stunning language ofthis proposal. Suffice it to say that this is one of the most extreme attacks, to date, on our national forests. Should you like more informationplease see this page,or to see the full list of egregious provisions within this bill, visitthis blog postfrom the Western Environmental Law Center. For more in-depth information on the Resilient Federal Forests Act (HR 2936) please seethis page from UCLA Berkeley Law.

An analysis of this bill can be foundhere. A letter from 71 organizations can be foundhere.

On November 1st, H.R. 2936 passed in the House of Representatives with a vote of 232-188. Below, please find a tweetsheet and email text, please…

Today a federal magistrate judge unsealed a superseding indictment charging Brexton Redell Lloyd, 54, of Eagle Springs, with one count of conspiracy and thirteen counts of violating the animal fighting prohibitions of the federal Animal Welfare Act, announced Acting United States Attorney Sandra J. Hairston for the Middle District of North Carolina, and Acting Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey H. Wood for the Department of Justice’s Environment and Natural Resources Division.

The charges returned today pertain to pit bull-type dogs allegedly kept by Lloyd at his residence in Eagle Springs. The Defendant allegedly possessed and trained the dogs for fighting ventures and conspiring to commit these acts throughout the United States. The dogs were seized by federal authorities in a search warrant executed in March 2017.

This case is part of Operation Grand Champion, a coordinated effort across numerous federal judicial districts to combat organized dog fighting. The phrase “Grand Champion” is used by dog fighters to refer to a dog with more than five dog-fighting “victories.” To date, approximately one hundred dogs have been rescued as part of Operation Grand Champion, and either surrendered or forfeited to the government.

The federal Animal Welfare Act makes it a felony punishable by up to five years in prison to knowingly sell, buy, possess, train, transport, deliver, or receive any animal, including dogs, for purposes of having the animal participate in an animal fighting venture. Under federal law, an animal fighting venture means “any event, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, that involves a fight conducted or to be conducted between at least two animals for purposes of sport, wagering, or entertainment.”

This part of Operation Grand Champion was investigated by the United States Department of Agriculture, Office of the Inspector General and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, in coordination with the Department of Justice, with assistance from the North Carolina State Highway Patrol and the Moore County Sheriff’s Office.

The government is represented by Assistant United States Attorney JoAnna G. McFadden of the Middle District of North Carolina and Trial Attorney Erica Pencak of the Justice Department’s Environmental Crimes Section, Environment and Natural Resources Division. The Humane Society of the United States assisted with the care of the dogs seized by federal law enforcement.

An indictment is an allegation based upon a finding of probable cause by a grand jury. A defendant is presumed innocent unless and until convicted.

If convicted, the defendant faces up to five years in prison and a $250,000 fine per count. The investigation is ongoing.

Submit a Complaint
Report Waste, Fraud, Abuse or Misconduct to the Inspector General
Find Sales of Seized Property
Find Help and Information for Crime Victims
Register, Apply for Permits, or Request Records
Identify Our Most Wanted Fugitives
Find a Form
Report and Identify Missing Persons
Contact Us
JUSTICE.GOV

"There is but one straight course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it steadily" - George Washington letter to Edmund Randolph — 1795. Going beyond the MSM idealogical opinion/bias and their focus on entertainment, sensationalism, emotionalism and activist reporting - this blogs goal is to, in some small way, put a plug in the broken dam of truth and save as many as possible from the consequences—temporal and eternal. "The further a society drifts from truth, the more it will hate those who speak it." - George Orwell